Method for providing services via a communication network

ABSTRACT

The invention relates to a method for providing services, preferably telecommunication and/or Internet services, via a communication network. A communication link ( 3 ) is set up between a host ( 2 ) and at least one client ( 4 ) of a user. A request from a user for the provision of a service via a client ( 4 ) is sent to a host ( 2 ). The host ( 2 ) communicates with a plurality of service provider clients ( 5,6,7 ). In order to reduce the processing time for the service and to increase the quality of the service thus provided, the services of the supplier are evaluated according to service-specific quality parameters by the host ( 2 ) and/or user and/or by third parties. Suppliers are automatically ranked by the host ( 2 ) on the basis of said evaluation. The host ( 2 ) provides the suppliers with the authorization and/or opportunity to offer or provide the requested service automatically according to their ranking priority.

The invention concerns a method for providing services over acommunications network according to the preamble of claim 1.Furthermore, the present invention concerns a system for providingservices over a communications network, preferably telecommunicationand/or internet services.

A method and a system for providing services over the internet isalready known from practice. In the known system, questions on a numberof fields of knowledge are answered by so-called experts. Afterproducing a communication link between a client and a host, a questionis asked of the host by the user via the client. The question asked bythe user via the client is displayed on a page of the host and can beread and possibly answered by other clients who likewise produce acommunication link with the host. In order to be able to answer thequestions with qualified answers in the shortest possible time, theknown method provides that the additional users can read more or lesssimultaneously via the additional clients the question asked via theclients and mediated or forwarded by the host and have themselvesregistered with the host as so-called logged-on answerers for thequestion, in which case only a predefined and limited number ofadditional users are granted the status of a “logged-on answerer” toanswer the question which has been asked. As a result, the circle ofpotential answerers is broadened to all users of the system, and theyhave the possibility of reading the questions asked online and answeringthem online, i.e., directly. However, not just any user is designated orentitled to answer the question asked. In the familiar method, there isan automatic limiting of the number of logged-on answerers by anappropriate status assignment, which is accomplished by the host. Thanksto this measure, a competitive situation is created among the additionalusers who wish to acquire the status of logged-on answerer, whichgenerally results in a situation where additional users often log on asanswerer immediately after a question is asked, in order to be grantedthe status of logged-on answerer. The status of logged-on answererinvolves the receiving of a fee or the like after answering thequestion. The amount of the fee depends on the evaluation by the user ofthe search result or the answer from the particular answerer. In thisway, the user can exercise a self-regulating influence on the qualityand efficiency of the answering of a question. As a result, thequestions asked are answered at once and generally with high quality.

The problem of the present invention is to provide a method and a systemof the above-mentioned kind in which requested services are provided inthe shortest possible time and with high quality.

The stated problem is solved by the features of claim 1 in a method ofthe kind mentioned above.

The requested service is transmitted by the user to the host, while therequested service is displayed on a page provided by the host or can beretrieved via the provider clients and/or is transmitted to the providerclients. The invention allows a provider with a high level in theranking or with high values for the quality parameters specific to theservice to offer or to provide the requested service before alower-level provider, or to be otherwise privileged with respect to thelower-level provider. This can be done, for example, in that allproviders simultaneously learn of the requested service and can transmittheir offers on a page provided by the host. The host can thenautomatically steer the forwarding of the offers to the user inaccordance with the ranking of the providers or display the offers tothe user in accordance with the ranking (staggered in time). It is alsopossible in theory for the requested service to be transmitted to theparticular provider clients by the host with an automatic timestaggering depending on the ranking of the providers, and thus theproviders can learn of the requested service one after the otheraccording to their ranking. In this case, the providers can transmit theoffers to the host or also directly to the client. This has a verypositive impact on the quality of the service provided.

Finally, the host in the invention performs an automatic mediatingfunction between the user and the providers and a selection functionfrom among the individual providers. It should also be pointed out thatthe host is a device in the manner of a central computer. This can beconstituted by an individual computer or a number of interlinkedcomputers. The client is likewise a device having computer hardware,such as a PC, laptop, PDA, mobile telephone, etc. It should also bepointed out that the term “client” and “provider client” means not justthe particular computer unit as such, but also the correspondingsoftware and hardware, including in particular keyboards, as well asdisplays, monitor screens, or the like, on which the relevantinformation is indicated.

If a remuneration is provided by the “first come-first served” principleonly to those providers who first offer or provide a service, eachprovider will strive to occupy the highest possible level in the rankingof all providers, so that they can be permitted to offer or provide theservice ahead of a competing provider. However, a high level in theranking is only given to those providers which have received arelatively good evaluation (ranking) by the host or user after providingthe service. This motivates the providers to offer and to provide arequested service such that their evaluation in terms of given qualityparameters specific to the service turns out to be relatively good. Thesame holds when the compensation is staggered in regard to the rankingor in regard to the provider's grade for the quality parameters specificto the service.

Moreover, it is to be noted that the “providing” of services via acommunications network can entail not just providing of information,although the prior art mentioned above concerns a method for providinginformation via a communications network. Other possible areas ofapplication of the invention also involve, for example, activities inthe realm of word processing or text translation. Basically, theproviding of services over a communications network can involve any formof services that can be offered by a plurality of providers and arerequested anonymously for the user through the communications network.But the area of use which is preferred is that where the user has aparticular question and the providers indicate to the user a suitableinternet page which can answer the question of the user.

It is essentially possible to include all providers communicating withthe host in their ranking and thus in sequence. But it is also equallypossible to perform a preliminary classification of the providers in themanner of an access hurdle in order to limit the number of providersadmitted and logged on, preferably in automatic fashion. For this, thehost can assign status, for example, as is already familiar from theaforesaid prior art, to which express reference is made. It ispreferable for the host to automatically limit the number of providersper question, specifically, to 2-10 providers, preferably 3-5 providers.In this connection, it is of special advantage if the service can onlybe provided by those providers who have previously obtained the statusof a “logged-on provider.” A “logged-on provider” is one who hasreceived approval from the host to make an offer for a specific inquiry,it being necessary, of course, for each provider to register ahead oftime with the host, and this can only be done with permission from thehost or the host's operator. Thanks to the assigned status, the“logged-on provider” has, for example, the right to access the incomingoffer page of the host, which non-logged-on providers cannot do. It isalso of special advantage in this connection that the logged-onproviders participating in the method of the invention are shown,preferably in real time, the number of logged-on providers for theirprovider clients or the number of providers authorized to perform aparticular service. This will create a transparent competition situationfor the individual providers. Furthermore, it is worthwhile granting alogged-on provider a reservation time during which he will be able toprovide the particular service. Within this reservation time, it is notpossible for another provider to get ahead of him.

The providers designated or approved for providing the service can beevaluated by the host automatically and/or by the user and/or by thirdparties. The determination of the ranking level and the sequence is thendone automatically by the host, so that the user can always be shown afavored selection of all providers designated or approved for providingthe service. This has a positive impact on the willingness of thecustomer or the user to make use of the method of the invention and alsoto accept the response offered to their query. In this connection, it isalso possible for the user to be able to decide which of the displayedhigh-ranking providers should ultimately provide the service. Thedecision of the user can be made, for example, on the basis of theevaluation or the service-specific quality parameter values of aprovider or a specific advertisement from each approved provider.Preferably, however, the host will automatically select one or morehigh-ranking providers to provide the requested service. In this case,the user himself preferably has no selection option, which substantiallysimplifies the method for the user.

The method of the invention is furthermore distinguished in thatproviders with comparatively poor service-specific quality parametervalues, which is tantamount to a worse reliability and/or a worsequalification of the particular provider for the providing of a service,have a comparatively lower chance of providing a requested service.Providers with a low ranking are therefore disadvantaged and/or may betotally excluded from the ranking or the evaluation of ranks. This meansthat a motivation is created for all service providers to achieve thebest or highest possible service-specific quality parameter values,which is possible for example by providing services of high quality.Furthermore, this promotes quality consciousness and concern for thecustomer among all service providers.

The invention allows the providers to be privileged in accordance withtheir particular level in the ranking, which occurs for example in thatthe providers are designated one after the other for providing oroffering the service, according to their level in the ranking. The term“one after the other” can mean, on one hand, that only the highestranking provider(s) can provide the service at first. Only afterwardscan the providers coming after the highest provider in the ranking witha comparatively lower ranking provide the service or make an offer tothe user. Basically, however, it is also possible to designate a certainnumber of providers to simultaneously provide the service, and theranking is used to select the ones with the highest ranks from among theavailable providers. Other forms of privileging are also possible. Inthe final analysis, a preference is granted to the higher rankings overthe lower rankings—as in a wolf pack.

A preferred embodiment of the method of the invention calls forassigning the providers in accordance with their particular ranking toat least two different qualification classes or groups with differentranking, and providers from a high-ranking qualification class aredesignated before the providers of a lower-ranking qualification classto provide or offer the service. According to the invention, thedifferent qualification classes each contain providers from a particularrange of the sequence. The qualification classes are used to divide upthe total number of providers included in a sequence into discretepartial ranges with providers of different qualification. Thequalification classes as such can likewise be arranged in the manner ofa sequence, and the ranking of the qualification class will depend onthe content of the qualification class or the ranking of the providersin the qualification class. In the most simple case, the host at firstassigns all providers to one qualification class. After evaluating theservices of the providers and determining the individual rankings andthen the sequence of all providers, a separation of the providers inaccordance with the ranking or the sequence can be done, withhigh-ranking providers assigned to a first qualification class andlower-ranking providers to a second qualification class.

In order to further enhance the quality in the providing of services andgive the providers incentives and a greater motivation to improveperformance, the invention also allows providers with a high ranking,preferably those with the highest ranking, to be designated at once toprovide the service and providers with a comparatively lower ranking tobe designated only to provide the service after a timeout expires, orstaggered in time by the duration of the timeout, which is doneautomatically by the host. Basically, the most qualified providersreceive a time advantage over the less qualified providers. Once again,the qualification of the providers is judged by means ofservice-specific quality parameters. The host will automatically imposea timeout between two providers of different ranking so that thelower-ranking provider can only respond afterwards to the servicerequest of the user or the request will only be forwarded to alower-ranking provider at a later time. This has the effect that theparticular providers are not designated at the same time to offer orprovide a service, but rather with time staggering. If remuneration isgiven only to the providers which are first to perform the service, thetimeout will constitute a high incentive to all providers to occupy thehighest possible level in the ranking.

Of course, it is equally possible to designate at once the providersfrom a high-ranking qualification class, preferably the highest rankingone, to provide the service, and providers from a comparativelylower-ranking qualification class can only provide the service or offerthe service after the timeout expires. This essentially means that atimeout is imposed between two qualification classes of differentranking. In this way, for example, all the providers assigned to thefirst qualification class could offer or provide the service at once(and with equal chances among themselves), while the providers of alower-ranking qualification class would have to wait for the timeout toexpire before being able to offer or provide the service.

Preferably, in order to evaluate the providers or determine the rankingsequence, service-specific quality parameter values of several providersare compared to each other by the host and/or service-specific qualityparameter values of the providers are compared to certain setpointvalues. This makes possible, on the one hand, a comparative evaluationamong several providers who are vying to provide a requested service. Itis equally possible, of course, to evaluate the providers by means ofstandardized evaluation criteria. Thus, either a relative evaluation ofthe providers or an absolute evaluation of providers by the host isessentially possible.

In order to continuously heighten the motivation of the providers andthe quality of the service performed by the particular provider, it ispreferable that the evaluation of the providers or the determination ofthe ranking sequence be done on the basis of a plurality of servicerequests and/or a plurality of services provided. Essentially, ofcourse, it is also possible to evaluate the providers already after oneservice is provided. Naturally, with an increasing number of evaluationsteps, the qualification of the providers can be judged increasinglybetter. In particular, individual services provided with very highquality or very low quality will not be overweighted, but averaged out.

Preferably, the evaluation of the service of a provider is based on timeand/or quality and/or quantity averaging of the service-specific qualityparameter values of the particular provider. In this way, the providercan be evaluated over a rather lengthy time and/or relative to otherproviders and/or absolutely in terms of predetermined setpoint values.This contributes to the high information content of the providerevaluation used in the method of the invention.

The evaluation of the providers to determine the ranking or theprivilege granted by the host, especially by imposing a timeout, can bedone, for example, on the basis of

the number of services provided,

the availability of the service provider, preferably in terms of theonline time of the provider, determined within a reference period,

the number of service offers submitted by the particular provider,

the number of service requests handled,

the number of service requests read,

the percentage of accepted service requests in relation to the servicerequests read,

the percentage of services provided,

the extent of the services provided,

the percentage of services provided in comparison to other providers,

the average time span up to acceptance of the service,

the average processing time to provide the service after acceptance,

the average time span until the results of the service reach the user orthe host,

the percentage of services provided that are deemed “unusable” or“deficient” or the like by the user or by the host,

the average grade of one or more service-specific parameter valueswithin a reference period and/or a particular type of services,

the average grade determined from at least one service-specific quality,determined at periodic intervals or by random selection of individualquality parameter values of the provider, and/or

a complex characteristic made from at least two of the aforementionedservice-specific quality parameters.

Even though the providers are designated one after the other inaccordance with the particular ranking in the sequence to provide oroffer the service, it is advisable, in order to further enhance thequality of the services provided, to simply not designate providers witha very low ranking or those from a very low qualification class to offeror provide the service. For example, the timeout for such providers canbe extended so much beyond the providers of higher ranking that it isgenerally no longer possible for such a provider to offer or provide theservices, for example, because the requested service has already beenprovided.

The length of the timeout can be set in dependence on the ranking of thequalification class and/or the ranking of the provider. Basically, it isalso possible to set the length of the timeout individually for aprovider. This offers the advantage that particularly qualifiedproviders can be more heavily favored by the host and nonqualifiedservice providers can be assigned an individual time penalty. This is ofadvantage, for example, when additional circumstances are at play,beyond just the evaluation of the provider in terms of service-specificquality parameters, such as to justify an even more severe penalizationof a lower-ranking provider as compared to the other providers. Theindividually set timeout can also result in the excluding of certainproviders from the general population of providers.

Furthermore, the length of the timeout can also be set in dependence onthe ranking distribution and/or the total number of providers (whohappen to be online) and/or the number of providers in a qualificationclass. This has the result of setting the time delay relative to theproviders who are logged on or are generally approved to provide theservice in the specific case. For example, if a high-ranking providerdrops out for any reason, or if several services are requested at thesame time, the timeout of a lower-ranking provider may be shortened oreven totally lifted. The important thing is that the timeout should notlead to a needless delay in providing or offering the service.

In order to constantly update the evaluations of the individualproviders and respond in a flexible way to changes in the quality of theservices provided or changes in the qualifications of the individualproviders, it is advantageous according to the invention to reevaluatethe providers after each service performed. Naturally, the evaluationcan also be done after several services are offered or performed, and/orperiodically.

In order to heighten the competitive situation among the providers andthereby improve the weeding out of unqualified providers, it ispreferable according to the invention that the requested service bedisplayed at the same time to all providers, and this in real time. Whenall providers learn of the requested service at the same time, accordingto the invention, providers with a lower ranking or those from a lowerqualification class can only offer or provide the service after thetimeout expires, but at least after the higher-ranking providers. Afterthe timeout expires, the particular provider can then offer or providethe requested service without any further delay.

In order to strengthen the competitiveness of the providers for a highranking and thereby ensure a high level of quality of services provided,a provider is shown the qualification class pertaining to him and/orother providers, and/or the ranking sequence, and/or theservice-specific quality parameter values. It is likewise possible toshow a provider the length of the timeout and/or the remaining timeuntil the timeout expires and/or the evaluation. This will increase themotivation of the provider to boost his own performance, since it ispossible for the provider to compare his performance directly with theperformance of competing providers and take appropriate steps to rise inthe rankings. Of course, it is also possible to give the user a glimpseinto the qualification of a provider. For example, the user can himselfdecide which of the service-specific quality parameters are of specialinterest to the service which he requires. In this connection, theinvention basically allows the user to carry out an individual weightingof the evaluation of the provider.

When a provider has been subject to a timeout for a particular time, asignal characterizing the expiration of the timeout can be presented tothe particular provider to notify them as to the imminent expiration ofthe timeout. For example, it is possible to configure the communicationlink between the host, the client, and the provider clients in such away that a service request of the user will be displayed directly to theprovider client of a blocked provider or to the host with a marking. Themarking notifies the respective provider that he is blocked in providingthe requested service. In order to notify the blocked provider as to theend of the timeout, the marking can change to a blinking signal, forexample. A change in color, for example from red to green, is alsopossible. In this case, the blocked provider knows that he can offer orprovide the requested service within a short time.

The invention shall now be described by means of the drawing, forexample, for a method of providing information via a communicationsnetwork, without restricting the general notion of the invention. Thisshows:

FIG. 1, a system for providing services across a communications networkat a time t_(n),

FIG. 2, the system represented in FIG. 1 at time t_(n+1).

In FIGS. 1 and 2 a system is represented for providing information via acommunications network, particularly the internet. In the presentinstance, the service being provided or offered is answering a question1. The system has a host 2, which communicates via a communication link3 to a client 4 of a user. The communication link 3 can be, for example,the internet. Of course, the communication link can also essentially beany wired or wireless link, such as a radio link. Furthermore, the host2 communicates with provider clients 5, 6, 7 likewise via communicationlinks 3. For example, it may happen that, after establishing thecommunication link 3 between the client 4 and the host 2, a question 1is asked of the host 2 by the user through the client 4 in order toobtain information, whereupon the question 1 asked via the client 4 isdisplayed on an answer page of the host 2. By means of the communicationlinks 3 provided between the provider clients 5, 6, 7 and the host 2,the question 1 displayed on a page of the host 2 can be read andanswered by the answerers 1 [sic] assigned to the provider clients 5, 6,7. In the meaning of the invention, the answerers involve the providersof the service “answering a question 1.” In order for theanswerer/provider to be able to answer the question 1, there preferablyoccurs a preceding registration of the provider, which makes it possibleto access the otherwise inaccessible answer page of the host 2.

FIG. 1 shows the system at time t_(n), when the user has asked aquestion 1 via the client 4 to the host 2 for the first time. In replyto the question 1, answers 8, 9, 10 from answerers are transmitted viathe provider clients 5, 6, 7 to the host 2 and displayed on another pageof the host 2. The transmittal of the answers 8, 9, 10 coming from theprovider clients 5, 6, 7 to the host 2 constitutes in the present casethe providing of the service “answering a question 1.” Usually,answering question 1 is done by designating a suitable internet page,indicating the respective internet address.

According to the invention, the communication links 3 between the host2, the client 4 and the provider clients 5, 6, 7 are configured suchthat the answerers or service providers can be evaluated by the host 2and/or by the user and/or by third parties in terms of givenservice-specific quality parameters. The answers 8, 9, 10 in the systemdescribed here each contain search results for the question 1 asked bythe user via the client 4 and can have a plurality of researchedresults. Furthermore, the answers 8, 9, 10 can be provided with acommentary from the answerer. The service-specific quality parametersused to evaluate the answerer or service provider can be, for example

the number of search results or the number of answers 8 or 9 or 10 thatan answerer transmits to the host 2,

the online time, measured relative to a reference period, during whichthe answerer maintains the communication link 3 between the host 2 andthe particular provider client 5, 6, 7,

the number of questions 1 read by an answerer,

the percentage of questions 1 processed by the answerer in relation tothe questions 1 displayed at the host 2,

the percentage of answers 8, 9, 10 provided with a commentary,

the extent of the commentary provided,

the percentage of questions 1 answered before other answerers orexclusively by one answerer,

the average length of time until the decision of an answerer to answer aquestion 1,

the average processing time to answer the question 1,

the average time it takes for the search result or answer 8, 9, 10 toreach the host 2,

the percentage of search results or answers 8, 9, 10 deemed “wrong” or“unusable,”

the average grade, for example, determined from every third searchresult of a provider,

a characteristic formed from at least two of the above-givenservice-specific quality parameters, and/or

the average grade from a plurality of evaluated service-specific qualityparameters and/or the average grade within a reference period and/or asubject area.

According to FIG. 1, the service-specific quality parameter is theprocessing time Δt₁, Δt₂, Δt₃ that is required by the particularprovider to answer the question 1 after it is asked by the user. FIG. 1represents the system at time Δt_(n), at which the user has for thefirst time asked a question 1 of the host 2 via the client 4 foranswering. The question 1 can be read by all answerers at the same time,for example. All answerers are at the same ranking. The answers 8, 9, 10provided via the provider clients 5, 6, 7 are transmitted to the host 2,where they are displayed to the user at differing speed, depending onthe individually varying processing time of the particular answerer.Thus, the answer 8 is displayed after a time span Δt₁, the answer 9after a time span Δt₂, and the answer 10 after a time span Δt₃. Since,in the present instance, the processing time of the answerers has beenchosen as the service-specific quality parameter, the answerer belongingto the provider client 5 has answered the question 1 the fastest, whilethe answerer belonging to the provider client 6 has answered thequestion 1 the slowest. If a remuneration is provided, for example, onlyfor the two fastest answerers, the answerer belonging to the providerclient 6 will receive no remuneration. Thus, each answerer has theinitial goal of answering the question 1 as fast as possible.

According to the invention, service-specific quality parameter values ofthe answerers, in the present case the processing time to answer thequestion 1, are compared to each other or to established setpointvalues. This can occur automatically by the host 2, for example.Furthermore, it is also possible for the user to directly evaluate otherservice-specific quality parameters through the client 4. An evaluationby a third party is also essentially possible. On the basis of theevaluation, a level or particular ranking value is automaticallydetermined by the host 2 for each individual answerer/provider and thena ranking sequence for the answerers is determined.

FIG. 2 shows the system at state t_(n+1), i.e., after the evaluation ofthe answerers has been done by the host and/or by the user and a rankinghas been produced. The ranking in the present case means that theanswerers belonging to the provider clients 5, 6, 7 are permitted toprovide the service in accordance with their particular ranking in thesequence. For example, the question 1 can only be displayed to thelower-ranking answerer in the sequence after it has been displayed tothe higher-ranking answerer. But basically any other type of privilegingof the higher-ranking answerer over the lower-ranking answerer is alsopossible. In the present case, the answerer belonging to the providerclient 5 occupies the highest ranking, while the answerer belonging tothe provider client 6 occupies the lowest ranking in the sequence. Ifthe user through the client 4 again asks a question 1 of the host 2, thehighest-ranking answerer belonging to the provider client 5 according tothe ranking sequence can read the question 1 first, while the answererbelonging to the provider client 6 is shown the question 1 last. Theanswerer belonging to the provider client 5 thus obtains a timeadvantage over the lower-ranking answerers, which helps him keep theprocessing time comparatively low for answering the question 1. Thisleads to a rewarding of the highest-ranking answerer, associated with amotivation of the lower-ranking answerers to improve their performance.

In an especially preferred embodiment of the invention, according toFIG. 2, providers with a comparatively low ranking are only designatedto provide the service after expiration of a timeout. This means thatthe time staggering between providers with different ranks in thesequence is increased. Thus, depending on the sequence, the providersare designated to provide the service not immediately one after theother, but staggered by the timeout. It is assumed in FIGS. 1 and 2 thatthe processing times Δt₁, Δt₂, Δt₃ to answer the question 1 areunchanged.

The answerer with the highest ranking according to FIG. 2, i.e., theanswerer belonging to the provider client 5, is the first one who canread and answer the question 1. The answerers belonging to the providerclients 6, 7, however, can only read and answer the question 1 afterexpiration of the timeout Δt₄. The timeout Δt₄ is chosen to be of equallength in the present case, but it can also be assigned dependent on theranking of an answerer or even individually. Preferably, the timeout isautomatically imposed by the host 2. The answers 9, 10 are thereforeindicated to the host 2 or to the client 4 with a delay by theprocessing time Δt₄+Δt₂ and Δt₄+Δt₃.

This has the consequence that each provider will do its best to occupythe highest possible ranking in the sequence, for fear of a timeout.Thus, the overall quality of the answers or the search results will besubstantially improved.

The incentive to occupy a high ranking in the sequence stems, forexample, from the fact that the evaluation of the answerers or thetimeout can have direct impact on the remuneration. Furthermore, it isalso possible that only a limited number of answerers will receiveremuneration, while the answerers responding to a question 1 later donot receive any remuneration. The pressure on the answerers to performis substantially intensified by the timeout, which has a positive impacton the quality of the service provided.

1. A method for providing services, preferably telecommunication and/orinternet services, through a communications network, wherein acommunication link (3) is established between a host (2) and at leastone client (4) of a user, wherein a request from a user for providing aservice is transmitted via a client (4) to the host (2) and wherein thehost (2) communicates with a plurality of provider clients (5, 6, 7) ofservice providers, characterized in that the services of the providersare evaluated in terms of service-specific quality parameters by thehost (2) and/or by the user and/or by third parties, and a rankingsequence of the providers is automatically determined by the host (2) onthe basis of this evaluation, and the host (2) automatically grants tothe providers the approval and/or possibility of offering or providingthe requested service depending on their particular ranking.
 2. Themethod according to claim 1, wherein the providers are assigned inaccordance to their particular ranking to at least two differentqualification classes with different ranking, and providers from ahigher-ranking qualification class are designated before the providersof a lower-ranking qualification class to provide or offer the service.3. The method according to claim 2, wherein at least one provider with ahigh ranking, preferably with the highest ranking, is designated at onceto provide the service, and providers with a comparatively lower rankingare only designated to provide the service after a timeout expires. 4.The method according to claim 3, wherein at least one provider from ahigh-ranking qualification class, preferably the highest ranking one, isdesignated at once to provide the service and providers from acomparatively lower ranking qualification class are only designated toprovide the service after a timeout expires.
 5. The method according toclaim 4, wherein the requested service is either displayed to alower-ranking provider and/or can be called up by the lower-rankingprovider after a timeout, or the request for the service is forwarded atonce and the lower-ranking provider can provide the service after thetimeout, or a service provided at once by a lower-ranking provider isforwarded to the client after the timeout.
 6. The method according toclaim 5, wherein, in order to evaluate the providers and/or determinetheir ranking, service-specific quality parameter values of severalproviders are compared to each other and/or service-specific qualityparameter values of the providers are compared to fixed setpoint values.7. The method according to claim 1, wherein the evaluation or thedetermination of the ranking is done automatically on the basis of aplurality of service requests and/or a plurality of services provided.8. The method according to claim 1, wherein the evaluation or thedetermination of the ranking is done automatically on the basis of timeand/or quality and/or quantity averaging of the service-specific qualityparameter values.
 9. The method according to claim 1, wherein the lengthof the timeout and/or the degree of handicapping is determinedindividually and/or in dependence on the ranking of the qualificationclass and/or the ranking of the provider.
 10. The method according toclaim 1, wherein the length of the timeout is determined in dependenceon the ranking distribution and/or the total number of providers and/orthe number or providers in a qualification class and/or the number ofproviders online at the time of the inquiry.
 11. The method according toclaim 1, wherein the services of the providers are reevaluated aftereach service is provided.
 12. The method according to claim 1, whereinthe service request is displayed to all providers at the same time. 13.The method according to claim 1, wherein the provider is shown theevaluation and/or the qualification class and/or the ranking sequenceand/or service-specific parameter values and/or the length of thetimeout and/or the remaining time until the timeout expires.
 14. Themethod according to claim 1, wherein a signal characterizing theexpiration of the timeout is presented to the provider.
 15. A system forproviding services through a communications network, preferablytelecommunication and/or internet services, having a host (2) connectedby communication links (3) to a client (4) and a plurality of providerclients (5, 6, 7) to carry out the method according to claim
 1. 16. Themethod according to claim 1 wherein at least one provider with a highranking, preferably with the highest ranking, is designated at once toprovide the service, and providers with a comparatively lower rankingare only designated to provide the service after a timeout expires. 17.The method according to claim 2 wherein at least one provider from ahigh-ranking qualification class, preferably the highest ranking one, isdesignated at once to provide the service and providers from acomparatively lower ranking qualification class are only designated toprovide the service after a timeout expires.
 18. The method according toclaim 1 wherein the requested service is either displayed to alower-ranking provider and/or can be called up by the lower-rankingprovider after a timeout, or the request for the service is forwarded atonce and the lower-ranking provider can provide the service after thetimeout, or a service provided at once by a lower-ranking provider isforwarded to the client after the timeout.
 19. The method according toclaim 1 wherein, in order to evaluate the providers and/or determinetheir ranking, service-specific quality parameter values of severalproviders are compared to each other and/or service-specific qualityparameter values of the providers are compared to fixed setpoint values.